They already make a bunch of semi-auto .22s made to look just like serious battle rifles (a good way to commit suicide by cop).

I wouldn't have to see an assault rifle, any rifle or handgun would do. If you're holding it, and pose a threat, you're gonna get shot.

It doesn't have to look like an AR or an AK. A Ruger .22 can still kill.

I've been shot at never by a police officer or Forest Service Ranger for shooting, or holding my AK. Probably because I respectfully put it down so they know I mean no threat. Once they see that, and still hang around, they can watch what I shoot at, which is usually clay pigeons.

My first post on the "neighbour blaster" thread!
I'm super proud of Obama to be showing some muscular liberalism and taking on the extremists and entrenched interests in the firearms economy. We should get worried when the NRA ditches their current president.

Two small points
1) -about rebelling -well, leaving aside we burned your sorry capital to the ground, we did have "an aprehended insurrection" in Quebec about 40 yrs back when some domestic nationalists (sound familar) took the law into their own hands and killed the british trade commissioner plus engaged in kidnapping. The muscular liberal PM, Trudeau (whom it should be noted swung leads up the cain route on bugaboo with hans moser) invoked the war measures act and when asked how far he was prepared to go to stop armed domestic insurrections stated "just watch me".

2) about standing down
Actually, we do have skin in the game, in vancouver we've got homicida drug gangs shooting the crap out of each other and sometimes killing innocents in the process. I am advised by some of my ski buddies who work on the integrated gang task force that a significant portion of this illegal weaponry is drifting northward from guess where?

Even "stupid Americans" can figure out that gun violence always involves ... you guessed it ... guns!

Dave,

We are all, in some part, tools of the media.

You speak of stupid Americans. Let me give you an analogy of what works in this country.

Solutions to large social problems like crime don't come from blaming inanimate objects or substances no matter how hard those same stupid Americans scream it on television. It doesn't work with booze, it doesn't work with drugs, and it won't work with firearms.

More enlightened Americans maybe can follow this logic since I throw in a little media spice:

Drunk driver homicides always involve alcohol. 30+ dead every single day of every single year. That means at the end of every week you could stack 210 women, children, and men into a wall roughly 250 feet long and 9 feet high.

Alcohol serves no purpose. It has no nutritional value and is, in fact, a poison. It's only purpose is to kill brain cells.

When a drunk kills a family of six do people scream "What was he drinking?". Nobody needs 80 proof whiskey! Do they scream "Why was he driving such a large car?" Of course not. They blame the person driving drunk, their behavior. It took over 80 years though for the stupid American public to realize this.

And yet, drunk driving murder is on the decline, albeit very slowly. Everyone these days has had the "Drunk Driving is bad" drilled into their skulls from a young age. Some attempts have been made to tighten distribution but walk into any liquor store and it's clear there is no shortage of product. Judging from the volumes sold, there are just as many drunks. It's just as easy to get as it's ever been.

Changing the culture of violence where that violence is originating from is the ONLY way to change murder rates in this country.

And let's stop saying "Gun violence". That just sounds retarded and immediately skips the root of the real problem. Violence is violence, murder is murder.

Solutions to large social problems like crime don't come from blaming inanimate objects or substances no matter how hard those same stupid Americans scream it on television. It doesn't work with booze, it doesn't work with drugs, and it won't work with firearms.

WTF are you talking about? Booze is highly regulated, so are drugs.

Please tell me you aren't going to use that tired old line that if laws against drugs worked, there wouldn't be heroin or crack on the streets... therefore, laws against guns won't work. Can you imagine what the streets would look like if crack or heroin weren't regulated/illegal? It would be tragedy in every direction.

Maybe if we regulated KILLING MACHINES more, people would take them a little more seriously and reduce the level of GUN violence to a more civilized level.

Survival, that is a rude and vulgar question. It is also a setup for your personal chest thumping over just how unfit I am to be defending my rights.

No, not at all. And no one is calling you out for posting too much to this thread. It's just that the entirety of your supertopo presence is here, on this one thread. And then you come out all chest thumpy, like you are the sole defender of our rights, or your rights, as though the rest of us aren't interested in keeping our rights.

I know what I've done to protect your rights. I thought it was a completely legit question. If you don't like it, you too may feel free to buzz off.

While a nation sorts out what it wants to do as a major Soverign nation.

True that, but you've met your new landlord i presume? yeah the ones from china..
The brutal reality is that America is a society in financial decline; likely it will emerge as a solid #2 in world economic rankings with a hyper german" model aided largely by the decline in Chinese competitiveness which is well underway. Meanwhile, and I say this as an American national by birth who holds great affection for my mother nation, you have to accept the reality that since you are no longer masters of your own destiny you will need to listen to global stakeholders-you are free to say no of course, but then you run the risk that people won't buy your T bills. International finance won't do this over guns, but they will do it over the metaphorical guns that are blazing in the house and senate. Your gun debate merely serves to highlight how you allow a small minority to pervert their selfishness into the perceived selflessness of individual freedoms. Last time I checked the fundamental right of school children to have the individual freedom to go to school and not get killed has everything to do with human dignity. Shame on those that would pervert this.

Last time I checked the fundamental right of school children to have the individual freedom to go to school and not get killed has everything to do with human dignity. Shame on those that would pervert this.

Yes, it's true. Most gun-owners are heartless baby killers.

Don't you see how you believe this shite you hear on TV? Does that make rational sense to you really?

Can't you see people as individuals rather than assuming all gun-owners must be in agreement with the NRA?

x2 on losing the superpower status though. We're beyond broke. But so is just about everyone else... The next 25 years should provide many opportunities around the world, if we can avoid global war.

Fear (not)
Hey I'm not saying nor inferring that anything less than a tiny minority of gun owners reign down death and misery -but thats the point -why should innocent peoples lives be sacrificed in the name of their rights. Citizens who want guns for sport or self defence have nothing to hide and apart from the most egregious of weapons, nothing to fear. How can this be a bad thing?

Imagine if after a series of climbing fatalities a bunch of well meaning citizens decide to pass laws against people buying hardware or ropes.

If someone killed themselves at a shooting range, do you think anybody here would give a damn? If someone killed 22 kids at a shooting range, I still don't think anyone would give much of a damn.

It's not the same as climbers getting hurt or killed. Your hobby is infringing on my rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, so yes, I do get a say in it. What possible argument can you make against universal background checks?

I'm sick of the crazies, talking about hypothetical fascist coups, dominating discussions about reasonable and measured steps to reduce gun violence. They are totally out to lunch, interested in fantasies and not on-the-ground realities of gun-related violence.